Friday, May 2, 2008 | Reason : In the News | print version

Print | Comments |

Was the new finger a 'natural' miracle?

by BBC

Thanks to Joe Running for the link.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7379745.stm

Was the new finger a 'natural' miracle?
By Caroline Parkinson
Health reporter, BBC News

The story of the man who re-grew a finger using "pixie-dust" has captured the imagination of many this week.

But a number of scientists have cast cold-water over the claims - and said it may have been a "natural" miracle.

Lee Spievak, 69, chopped off part of his finger - said to be almost down to the first joint - in a model aeroplane accident in 2005.

His brother was working in the field of regenerative medicine, with Dr Stephen Badylak at the University of Pittsburgh.

They provided Mr Spievak, who lives in Cincinnati, Ohio, with the "pixie-dust" - more accurately called extracellular matrix, which he sprinkled on his finger.

Extracellular matrix is, essentially, the support structure for cells which is present in all animal and human tissue.

Within weeks, it is said the tip of the finger - including bone, tissue, skin and nail grew back.

'A common-or-garden injury'

Dr Badylak's team had previously been working on regenerating much simpler biological structures using the extracellular matrix.

That is something that numerous teams of scientists across the world have been pursuing for decades.

Extracellular matrix is just one of the "scaffolds" for supporting new cell growth.

But re-growing a fingertip would be a significant step forward.

Professor Stephen Minger, an expert in stem cell and regenerative medicine at Kings College London, said: "This is where my scepticism comes in. It would be a really complex task.

"At the moment people are trying to figure out how to make heart, brain and liver cells.

"I don't see how they could re-grow a fingertip by sprinkling on extracellular matrix."

Mr Spievak says he has regained feeling in his finger.

But Professor Minger said: "When people have a fingertip reattached, the nerves don't re-grow and people have no sense of pressure, or of pain."

'A remarkable process'

Scientists say they want to see research by Dr Badylak published in peer-reviewed journals - which means work has been assessed by other experts - rather than simply hearing anecdotal reports.

Simon Kay, professor of hand surgery at the University of Leeds said he suspected that Mr Spievak had sustained a "very common-or-garden, mundane fingertip injury" which had not affected the bone or led to the loss of the nail.

Posted: Friday, May 2, 2008 | Permalink

Comments 1 - 50 of 83 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #174387 by Jiten on May 2, 2008 at 11:01 am

Whatever the explanation turns out to be it will not be supernatural.

Other Comments by Jiten

2. Comment #174389 by DamnDirtyApe on May 2, 2008 at 11:13 am

Natural? This sounds like a clinical trial. Its just not been published yet.

Other Comments by DamnDirtyApe

3. Comment #174391 by moderndaythomas on May 2, 2008 at 11:16 am

It will turn out to be as Simon Kay sais

"a very common-or-garden, mundane fingertip injury"

Or will be relegated to the anals of spontaneous combustion and cloned humans.

We'll see what the demand for some peer-review will bring.

Other Comments by moderndaythomas

4. Comment #174396 by Abhishek on May 2, 2008 at 11:26 am

Interesting. I wonder if Mr. Spievak is religious or prayed for the finger to grow back...

I agree with Jiten, the explanation will of course have to do with the genetics of cellular repair and tissue regeneration. The extra-cellular matrix might not have done anything or it may have served as a catalyst or provided the stimulus to wake up quiescence cells. It'll be interesting to see what the actual explanation is once the researchers figure it out.

Other Comments by Abhishek

5. Comment #174402 by DavidJGrossman on May 2, 2008 at 11:34 am

Human fingertip regeneration is nothing new (google it). Salamanders can regenerate entire limbs.

Other Comments by DavidJGrossman

6. Comment #174403 by Star Spangled Eagle on May 2, 2008 at 11:35 am

I hate how they call it "pixie dust" wtf is wrong with these people? Does everything have to have a cute little name for the general public to understand it? Why not call it "extracellular matrix"

John Q. Public: The Matrix? What's that?

It's where you go when you take the red pill, doofus.

Arg.... fucking pixie-dust. gimme a break!

Other Comments by Star Spangled Eagle

7. Comment #174408 by Szymanowski on May 2, 2008 at 11:42 am

I hope that teaches the BBC not to report extraordinary medical discoveries as if they're real before they've been peer-reviewed and published.

Other Comments by Szymanowski

8. Comment #174409 by quill on May 2, 2008 at 11:43 am

Wait a minute. He didn't even cut into the bone? Unless I'm reading this wrong, it seems he only cut off a part of the tip of his finger, and only superficially. Yet when it grew back - a miracle!!

Other Comments by quill

9. Comment #174411 by Abhishek on May 2, 2008 at 11:45 am

DavidJGrossman:

Human fingertip regeneration is nothing new (google it). Salamanders can regenerate entire limbs.

I think the reason it's interesting is because although other species may have extraordinary regenerative capacity, humans generally are not known to be able to regenerate working, complex body parts (including apparently complete re-innervation that this guy has).

Other Comments by Abhishek

10. Comment #174412 by Epinephrine on May 2, 2008 at 11:45 am

Regeneration of digit-tips in mice is known, and humans can too; Scientific American had an article on this (April 2008), and says that it has been documented in medical journals thousands of times. Work is being done to determine what processes are behind this in mice, since we can't randomly chop fingers off people - but apparently the literature is full of cases of children, teenagers, and even adults regenerating fingertips. One "treatment" that doesn't work is to put a skin flap over it - this will prevent regeneration even in salamanders.

Other Comments by Epinephrine

11. Comment #174423 by Vinelectric on May 2, 2008 at 12:05 pm

Within weeks the nail grew back? After being chopped to almost the joint?

Well if you injured your nailbed, say trapped in a door, you'd need three to four nail growth cycles for it to regain its concave contour like the picture shown. We're talking two years. This nail recovered its natural structure in weeks?

Piss off.

Other Comments by Vinelectric

12. Comment #174425 by Abhishek on May 2, 2008 at 12:07 pm

I think this is the article Epinephrine is referencing.

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=regrowing-human-limbs

Other Comments by Abhishek

13. Comment #174431 by Elles on May 2, 2008 at 12:13 pm

I heard about him in Scientific American?

Why won't God cure amputees?

Because he's lazy and wants to leave it to science... like everything else...

Impotent fool...

Other Comments by Elles

14. Comment #174435 by moderndaythomas on May 2, 2008 at 12:25 pm

Why won't God cure amputees?

Was it James Randi that when walking past all the canes and wheel chairs back stage of one of the more infamous faith healers sound sets, asked, "what, no prosthetics?"

Other Comments by moderndaythomas

15. Comment #174437 by Stephen Maxwell on May 2, 2008 at 12:27 pm

Well if you injured your nailbed, say trapped in a door, you'd need three to four nail growth cycles for it to regain its concave contour like the picture shown. We're talking two years. This nail recovered its natural structure in weeks?

Hmmm. I don't know about two years. On December 11th 2007 I had an accident on a train where I completely - I repeat...completely - lost a fingernail by jamming it in a window. Nasty business, but I would say by mid-April it had regained it's natural structure so much so that it's no longer noticeable.

At the hospital I was told it would take around 3 months...it took 4 months, but 2 years is a bit of an excessive estimate, imo.

Other Comments by Stephen Maxwell

16. Comment #174447 by Christownsend on May 2, 2008 at 12:42 pm

Ben Goldacre demolishes this story on his Bad Science site here:

http://www.badscience.net/?p=664#more-664

Other Comments by Christownsend

17. Comment #174453 by Bizarro Dawkins on May 2, 2008 at 12:47 pm

Is it possible that this "pixie dust" simply accelerates the fingertip regeneration?

Also, I find it absurdly boorish when some of the atheists on this site bash God on an article that is totally unrelated to the issue of His existence (or non-existence). It suggests an insecurity in their own beliefs since they find the need to twist any issue (relevant or not) to validate their belief that God must certainly not exist. Can't they just save it for the articles that are actually relevant to that topic?

Other Comments by Bizarro Dawkins

18. Comment #174456 by decius on May 2, 2008 at 12:55 pm

Bizarro, no one requires your presence here and you won't certainly dictate us what can be said with regard to your imaginary god. Do you find it boorish? Go and jerk off on a crucifix and leave us in peace.

Other Comments by decius

19. Comment #174458 by Mark Smith on May 2, 2008 at 12:57 pm

Bizarro
Ever been to church?
How do you feel about those preachers who hang their sermons on matters totally unrelated to god's existence? Do you stand up and say, 'How absurdly boorish of you reverend'?
Or how about the Bible. Do you find that boorish when it finds god in a whirlwind or an earthquake?

Other Comments by Mark Smith

20. Comment #174460 by Don_Quix on May 2, 2008 at 1:00 pm

Also, I find it absurdly boorish when some of the atheists on this site bash God on an article that is totally unrelated to the issue of His existence (or non-existence).

Well, this is the Richard Dawkins website. Perhaps you would feel more comfortable over at Answers In Genesis.

Personally, I find it absurdly boorish when some glassy-eyed nymph knocks on my door at 8am on a Saturday to tell me "the Good News"! Unfortunately for them, I'm usually naked when I answer the door.

I think that "absurdly boorish" feeling you are experiencing, Bizarro, is the painful sting of truth jabbing into the rotten core of your fairy tale beliefs.

Other Comments by Don_Quix

21. Comment #174462 by phatbat on May 2, 2008 at 1:01 pm

17. Comment #174453 by Bizarro Dawkins

Yeah bizarro - it's different when god is getting brought up in a negative way isnt it.

It's just a sign of how sick a lot of people here are of all the piety that gets preached about god everytime anything really good/bad happens as if it's something to do with him. And what you see here is people bringing him up sarcasticly because you can bet your arse a theist will do the same to use it as an example of a miricle.

Other Comments by phatbat

22. Comment #174469 by Corylus on May 2, 2008 at 1:22 pm

Actually, I 'm quite glad to see Bizarro back. While he is here he is talking. Ok, generally being priggish and snide, but talking nonetheless.

He is not stupid and it breaks my heart to think of his promising mind in the intellectual prison that is Liberty University.

I'm not ready to give up yet.

------

Bizarro What are your views on god healing amputees? Is he unable? Or able but unwilling?

Other Comments by Corylus

23. Comment #174472 by Raiko on May 2, 2008 at 1:27 pm

I don't even really understand the big deal. Some animals have the ability to regrow a lot more than a fingertip, so there are possible mechanisms to achieve this. I suppose we usually don't have or employ these mechanisms, for whichever reasons, but who's to say that it can't ever happen?

Other Comments by Raiko

24. Comment #174473 by Tetsujin on May 2, 2008 at 1:28 pm

This isn't really news. Check out Ted.com there was a featured presentation on limb regeneration filmed back in 2006 and posted on their site in july last year.

I can't remember the video exactly but I thought he said at that time that it was 2 years ago.

http://www.ted.com/talks/view/id/142

Sorry, I'm new here and don't know how the make the hyperlink.

Edit: wow.... it did the link itself.... kudos to the site designer

Other Comments by Tetsujin

25. Comment #174480 by Solarium Solaris on May 2, 2008 at 1:40 pm

I actually kinda sort of agree with bizarro. it gets really old and annoying when people keep posting the same things about every article ("yeah, but we all know that in reality goddidit" is the most common, and most annoying. its not funny anymore. -please stop saying it as if it was). It seems as if some atheists on this site just want some excuse to make fun of religious people and their stupidity.

Ps: Im an atheist and a huge fan of rd)

Other Comments by Solarium Solaris

26. Comment #174481 by rod-the-farmer on May 2, 2008 at 1:42 pm

Tetsujin

Yes, the links work when you have them in your original article. But if you go back and EDIT your article, any link you add, will not work. Plan

ahead

as they say.

Other Comments by rod-the-farmer

27. Comment #174489 by moderndaythomas on May 2, 2008 at 1:55 pm

but who's to say that it can't ever happen?

It's not so much saying it can't happen, it's just that it's equally as probable as, say, you growing wings and flying.
Animals do that too but.
It's just unlikely.

And if God is capable of healing an organic disease, he's more than capable of regrowing a paltry limb.
So where are all the prosthetics?

Other Comments by moderndaythomas

28. Comment #174492 by Don_Quix on May 2, 2008 at 1:57 pm

Ps: Im an atheist and a huge fan of rd)

Ps: goddidit

Other Comments by Don_Quix

29. Comment #174496 by Border Collie on May 2, 2008 at 2:01 pm

Why do you YECs use this site? Don't you have some witnessing to do or some idoitic anti-evolution films to make or some small children to scare to death?

Other Comments by Border Collie

30. Comment #174497 by justdust on May 2, 2008 at 2:02 pm

Does this mean you people don't believe in pixies either?! Not long now and I will be able to count the number of genuine pixies encounters I have had on the fingers of one hand.

Other Comments by justdust

31. Comment #174500 by Border Collie on May 2, 2008 at 2:05 pm

Yes, I believe in Hell ... It's right here and now having to constantly and incessantly deal with fundameltalist idiocy in my every day life.

Other Comments by Border Collie

32. Comment #174504 by matlot on May 2, 2008 at 2:10 pm

I have to agree with Solarium Solaris (comment 25);

The tone occasionally becomes quite shrill in the comments section. This is a shame because we are supposed to be the rational community.

Bad science reporting is bad science reporting, there's no sense in blaming religion for it. Bashing religion is fun, but deploying our salvos with greater precision is surely more effective.

Other Comments by matlot

33. Comment #174515 by robotaholic on May 2, 2008 at 2:37 pm

hmmm -I think Bobbit would like to hear about this...

Other Comments by robotaholic

34. Comment #174518 by Ascaphus on May 2, 2008 at 2:46 pm

...some of the atheists on this site bash God on an article that is totally unrelated to the issue of His existence (or non-existence)...

But apparently references the other way are completely invisible to you, Bizzaro. What is the title of the article? If there is a point to Dawkins' outspoken atheism, it's that religious language and thinking permeates our culture, to the detriment of society and our thinking ability. What in tarnation is the word 'miracle' doing in the article in the first place? The atheists on this list are not the ones responsible for bringing it up.

Many of us think that it is indeed science that is amazing, and that whenever people see something wonderful it is always the result of science or the natural world itself, and that invoking 'miracles' or any reference to the supernatural is ignorant, rude to the people who worked hard on the real world solution, and fails to let people recognize or truly appreciate both nature and science, substituting comic-book ideas instead. The bottom line is, it's insulting to invoke 'miracle' for amazing things; and though you recognize the blatant insults hurled by the less than polite folks on the list, you completely fail to recognize the insult that is hurled by the title of this article, and by all religious types who fail to recognize the true source of wonder.

Matt

Other Comments by Ascaphus

35. Comment #174522 by Vinelectric on May 2, 2008 at 2:51 pm

Stephen Maxwell

I'm glad you did. You probably had a nail avulsion. So long as the underlying nailbed, the germinal matrix, is not crushed you grow your nail in a few months.

A nailbed injury, the fleshy pink stuff that makes nails, if not repaired surgically can not take less than two years to regenerate its natural contour unless you sprinkle "pixie-dust" or have some salamander gene therapy!!

That man grew bone, flesh, nail and nailbed from committed adult soft tissue cells. Rubbish.

Other Comments by Vinelectric

36. Comment #174525 by Corylus on May 2, 2008 at 2:57 pm

Robotaholic

You're a good looking guy - one picture at a time is fine :-)

Other Comments by Corylus

37. Comment #174526 by Donald on May 2, 2008 at 3:00 pm

I find it absurdly boorish when some of the atheists on this site bash God on an article that is totally unrelated to the issue of His existence (or non-existence). - Ryan (Bizarro)

Actually articles about healing amputees are related to the issue of god's existence. Have you visited and read the site http://www.whydoesgodhateamputees.com/ ?

It suggests an insecurity in their own beliefs since they find the need to twist any issue (relevant or not) to validate their belief that God must certainly not exist. - Bizarro

Insecurity can be exhibited in many ways. Drive-by comments as opposed to sustained dialogue with people who have studied the matter and have opposing views, for example.

Actually I agree that RD.net is oversupplied with insulting, rude and uncivilised comments (some of which are justified by extreme provocation from pervasive religious lunacy). However there are atheists here who focus on being polite, kind and thoughtful, just like your family and religious mentors, but without treating ancient myths as if they were factual. If you wanted to seriously debate the question of god's existence, how society obtains moral values, and how society could promote the kind of loving, caring society we all want, without believing in fictional gods, then you could certainly find suitable people here to do that. I think Corylus was essentially offering that in her reply to you.

Other Comments by Donald

38. Comment #174527 by Vinelectric on May 2, 2008 at 3:04 pm

Bizarro Dawkins

Is it possible that this "pixie dust" simply accelerates the fingertip regeneration?

The finger tip is a composite of several different cell lines. You may, in theory, accelerate the growth of each line separately. To regenerate a whole segment of finger (note the man had a near amputation, just short of the first joint) the remaining cells need to revert to a non committed stem cell lineage then re grow just the right amount and proportion of tissue to achieve not just the right composition, but the right structure and contour as well.

When scientists talk about heart, liver, pancreas regeneration they are hoping to culture an amorphous, homogenous block of tissue derived from pluri-potential stem cells. Not that you'd ever hope to grow a beating heart with its complex electrical circuitry or self regulating vascular tree. If you can appreciate the intricate anatomy of any sub-part of your own hands you'd scream FORGERY!! straight away at this article.

Other Comments by Vinelectric

39. Comment #174539 by Bizarro Dawkins on May 2, 2008 at 3:56 pm

"Why do you YECs use this site? Don't you have some witnessing to do or some idoitic anti-evolution films to make or some small children to scare to death?"

I personally find it shameful that I am the only self-declared Christian I have ever seen comment on this website. Do you have any idea how many atheists challenge Christians on *Christian* forums? If atheists aren't scared to engage Christians in debate on their own websites, then why don't Christians have the guts to do the same on atheist sites?

I believe this unfortunate fact demonstrates a general lack of intellectual integrity within pop Christianity. Christians, and everyone else for that matter, need to know what they believe and why they believe it. If we aviod the arguments against our beliefs, I believe that speaks volumes not necessarily about the particular belief, but rather our committment to that belief.

Now please don't think that I believe myself to be a super-Christian or anything like that. I have my own flaws, but I believe that this particular area is one where the Church is failing miserably, and it is a situation that must be remedied if for no other reason than to attain a respectable level of intellectual honesty. As Elton Trueblood puts it, "the unexamined faith is not worth having".

Other Comments by Bizarro Dawkins

40. Comment #174541 by righton on May 2, 2008 at 4:01 pm

Bizarro

"I personally find it shameful that I am the only self-declared Christian I have ever seen comment on this website. "

You obviously havent commented here for very long. They come around quite often, especially lately.

Other Comments by righton

41. Comment #174546 by righton on May 2, 2008 at 4:10 pm

"I believe that this particular area is one where the Church is failing miserably, and it is a situation that must be remedied if for no other reason than to attain a respectable level of intellectual honesty."

One way for the church to attain a respectable level of intellectual honesty is to admit that evolution is a fact and that it contradicts the bible in many ways.

Other Comments by righton

42. Comment #174547 by Mark Smith on May 2, 2008 at 4:12 pm

Bizarro
It is very encouraging that you are committed to intellectual integrity and to examination of your faith. But be aware (or should that be 'beware'?): going too far in that direction might lead you to new and exciting realms. Those values were among the main reasons why I concluded I could not continue to be a Christian; and on 'deconverting' I have found tremendous intellectual and other freedom.

Other Comments by Mark Smith

43. Comment #174549 by Donald on May 2, 2008 at 4:15 pm

I personally find it shameful that I am the only self-declared Christian I have ever seen comment on this website. Do you have any idea how many atheists challenge Christians on *Christian* forums? If atheists aren't scared to engage Christians in debate on their own websites, then why don't Christians have the guts to do the same on atheist sites? - Ryan (Bizarro)

Well said! (But there have been quite a few other self-declaring Christians here. They tend to disappear after a while. It's not only the insults. They also get serious replies that (I think) make them worry about whether their beliefs are really well-founded.)

Other Comments by Donald

44. Comment #174551 by Bizarro Dawkins on May 2, 2008 at 4:20 pm

Ascaphus,

I agree with your comment to an extent. Please notice however that just as I criticize reading something into this article that in reality simply isn't there for the purpose of bashing God, neither do I condone the tendency that some Christians have to over-spiritualize everything. And I do believe that it's quite a stretch to make the claim that the author of this article was somehow supporting the idea of miracles. It's called creative writing. Whether or not it is totally appropriate in a piece geared towards science is certainly debatable, but *please* tell me when the last time was that the BBC of all news networks supported supernaturalism?

I think you're being a bit oversensitive. The word miracle is only mentioned once in the body of the article. Not to mention, in the context of the title it is obvious that the writer was only trying to find a creative way to say that this was what many believe to be an amazing event. Honestly, what do you think the writer meant by "natural miracle"? That's a blatant contradiction, and if this person is a journalist for the BBC I'm sure they wouldn't have hired someone so incredibly stupid as to realize that it wasn't. It's just a play on words, nothing more.

Other Comments by Bizarro Dawkins

45. Comment #174554 by BillySands on May 2, 2008 at 4:29 pm

Bizarro, we have been trying to get YECS to provide evidence for their beliefs elsewhwere with no sucess. Care to try?

I believe I challenged you on toothed hens before you left last time. Any comments?

Other Comments by BillySands

46. Comment #174555 by Mark Smith on May 2, 2008 at 4:29 pm

Bizarro

but *please* tell me when the last time was that the BBC of all news networks supported supernaturalism?

If you are talking about news specifically, the BBC reports events but does not take a definitive position on supernatural interpretations. Are you suggesting it should do otherwise? If you aren't talking about the news, the BBC often has programmes which are positive about supernatural matters, while having others that take other perspectives. That is what it does.

Other Comments by Mark Smith

47. Comment #174557 by BillySands on May 2, 2008 at 4:31 pm

Songs of praise every bloody sunday! I believe some of the radio stations have daily god slots. Do any have daily godless slots?

Other Comments by BillySands

48. Comment #174558 by Solarium Solaris on May 2, 2008 at 4:40 pm

Comment #28 by Don Quix

Goddidit

Posters here never cease to amaze me with their creativity.

Other Comments by Solarium Solaris

49. Comment #174559 by phasmagigas on May 2, 2008 at 4:41 pm

well its all a bit silly isnt it. 'pixie dust' thats a bit like calling sutures 'magic fairy threads' and then saying 'but scientists are really thinking that the holding together of the wound isnt really by faries'.

im not sure i get where the article is coming from, as for bizarros statements, well poor bloody god, why cant some atheist just get off his back eh, poor mite, my heart bleeds for god.

its got nought to do with insecurity, people just like taking the piss.

Other Comments by phasmagigas

50. Comment #174562 by Geoff on May 2, 2008 at 4:55 pm